Jump to content

Iving

  • Content Count

    921
  • Joined

  • Last visited

About Iving

  • Rank
    ⠀Banned

Recent Profile Visitors

The recent visitors block is disabled and is not being shown to other users.

  1. Thank you but it's clear from the OP that I want to hear from people who *do* hear a difference. We have already put the cpu/horsepower issue to bed on your behalf. It is moot. We don't need further evidence. May I re-iterate - considerations such as these are ancillary at best. I am interested in Subjective accounts of SQ by compression level and arguments or justifications relating to why a given setting may be *better* - not just different.
  2. Thank you but it's clear from the OP that I want to hear from people who *do* hear a difference. HDD space is a non-issue for me - I understand it is for you (and others). I am interested in SQ only. The OP assumes flac is lossless explicitly. You are saying that the compression level can be changed by conversion and without loss. OK. May I re-iterate - considerations such as these are ancillary at best. I am interested in Subjective accounts of SQ by compression level and arguments or justifications relating to why a given setting may be *better* - not just
  3. If I understand you, what you are saying is broadly in line with Maor_avni (supra). May I re-iterate - considerations such as these are ancillary at best. I am interested in Subjective accounts of SQ by compression level and arguments or justifications relating to why a given setting may be *better* - not just different.
  4. 3-6 leaves 0-2 (low compression) and 7-8 (high compression) outside its range. It's usually assumed that more [cpu] "horsepower" is required for decoding of higher compression levels. As I posted above, Maor_avni at roonlabs says, "I would even suggest that larger files make the decoder work harder, since it has to pull more bytes from the stream." I find this beguiling as explained. So the horsepower issue may be somewhat moot for "any compression". Otherwise it's not clear what you mean by "many issues". May I re-iterate - considera
  5. This has nothing to do with forgetting new rules. The OP is clear that this sort of remark or contribution is excluded/unwanted/irrelevant. It's a stand alone unambiguous mischief case.
  6. That is such a deliberate and flagrant breach of the OP that you deserve censure @The Computer Audiophile.
  7. Beguiling post here from Maor_avni: https://community.roonlabs.com/t/effect-of-flac-compression-on-sq/8843/5 This argument, as I read/understand it, is that there is *not* a (positive) correlation (of sorts) between compression level and cpu work such that 8 requires most cpu work and 0 least (leaving aside uncompressed for the moment). All flac compression levels require the "same" cpu work. If this were true, and we were looking only to cpu work vs. I/O load trade-off as explanation, then the choice becomes merely uncompressed vs. "any compressed". In
  8. Whilst this may seem a hackneyed topic at first glance, I have done a lot of "desktop research" in the past 24-48 hrs, and not found convincing discussion here on AS or elsewhere that maps directly to my central concern. I hope that folks with *relevant first hand experience* can chime in to flavour my reflections on my own observations. I need to make a decision on how to proceed with ripping CDs from here, and want to optimise the odds that I'll be happy with what I'm doing down the line. The short version: A. Can flac compression levels - from uncompressed thru 0 thru 8 -
  9. Suppose I should add/explain - my cables are heat-moulded to fit. Even if the eR were not anchored there would be no/negligible strain on it.
  10. Although not strictly a weight, my solution is evident in the following posts. Probably my whole system by some standards is over-engineered; nevertheless, there is zero strain/torque on the eR notwithstanding very stiff/heavy cables - and my heatsink was carefully chosen and fitted over an exactly-cut thermal pad.
  11. 1 egg can not be more than 100% - but only of one egg. I said something different entirely - that 3 eggs are 150% of 2 eggs. Yes you can have 100% as an absolute reference. I cannot eat more than 100% of my wife's breakfast provided you understand that 2 eggs = 100% of her breakfast and I will not cook her "seconds". Many posters here are emphasising that percentages - in mathematical terms - are ratios. That is also correct. You can have any ratios you like unless they are preposterous. It does all boil down to whether you think the ad intended to mislead r
  12. I can. When I cook our breakfast in the morning, I fry 2 eggs for my wife and 3 for me. I get 150% of what she does. Or a 150% share. Isn't it more common to put it like that than 3/2. Or that she gets 1/3 of a box of half-a-dozen and I get 1/2. I'm all for no BS. Someone made the point that BJC have gone very jazzy with some products. I found from first hand experience that AQ Cinnamons sound better than several others at or below the price point, including BJC. My system is good/balanced right now, but if I had to upgrade something it would be the RJ/E, and I would go for silver
  13. Just a few 2c thoughts. I guess my focus is on key reference terms and their meaning/fulness. I am a Computer Audiophile fantasising - as I read the conversation so far - that I had an Extreme and, so, I trust my reflections are on topic. Prequel: Hats off to Emile for pioneering the design with all that R&D - and also @ray-dude for these classy, informative and entertaining write-ups. I would relish trialing the Extreme in lieu of the PC in my system [see signature line] - in which case it would have no "input" - and its output would be ethernet, not USB.
  14. If we're waiting for markdowns, perhaps the first "preloved" ad will come much sooner than the first holiday sale.
×
×
  • Create New...